Conference expansion and game theory?

Jeebus, is there a more pompous twit in college athletics than Jim Delany?

During this relatively quiet time, the Big Ten began to analyze the college sports landscape and attempted to determine what was ahead of the curve that their rival conferences weren’t seeing. They played game theory and asked themselves what would be both the obvious and unintended consequences if they expanded again. They eventually came to the realization that there was far more risk in defending the status quo than being proactive and making a new acquisition. What might not have made a lot of sense fifteen years ago made imminent sense now. For the Big Ten, it became clear that it wasn’t a question of whether the conference should expand anymore, but rather what school they should add.

So that’s how you get to Maryland and Rutgers.

About these ads

4 Comments

Filed under Big Ten Football

4 responses to “Conference expansion and game theory?

  1. Just Chuck (The Other One)

    To answer your question: No. There is not a more pompous twit in college athletics.

  2. X-Dawg

    Using “pompous” & “twit” in the same sentence as “Jim Delany” is being a bit redundant, IMO.

  3. Dog in Fla

    There’s a reason they stage imperialist B1G Jim in front of “The Ultimate Driving Machine®” banner